Spring Framework DoS, Injection, and Auth Vulnerabilities

Unsafe JSON deserialization in Spring Framework's JMS message converters (MappingJackson2MessageConverter and JacksonJsonMessageConverter) lets an attacker who controls JMS message content instantiate arbitrary classes, enabling gadget-chain attacks that can escalate to unauthorized actions or remote code execution. It affects Spring Framework 5.3.0-5.3.48, 6.1.0-6.1.27, 6.2.0-6.2.18, and 7.0.0-7.0.7 when applications consume messages from an untrusted JMS source. There is no public exploit identified at time of analysis, and despite a 9.8 CVSS the EPSS probability is only 0.04% and CISA SSVC rates exploitation as 'none'.

Denial of service in Spring Framework's AntPathMatcher allows remote unauthenticated attackers to exhaust CPU resources via Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when attacker-controlled patterns are passed to match(), matchStart(), or extractUriTemplateVariables(). Affects Spring Framework 5.3.0-5.3.48, 6.1.0-6.1.27, 6.2.0-6.2.18, and 7.0.0-7.0.7. No public exploit identified at time of analysis, EPSS is very low (0.01%, 2nd percentile), and SSVC indicates no observed exploitation.

Denial of service in VMware's Spring Framework (versions 5.3.0-5.3.48, 6.1.0-6.1.27, 6.2.0-6.2.18, and 7.0.0-7.0.7) lets remote attackers exhaust memory in applications that evaluate user-supplied Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions, where crafted expressions trigger unbounded internal cache growth. No authentication or user interaction is required per the CVSS vector (PR:N/UI:N), and the impact is availability-only (C:N/I:N/A:H). There is no public exploit identified at time of analysis, and the EPSS probability is very low (0.01%, 2nd percentile), though CISA's SSVC framework flags the issue as automatable.

Denial of service in Spring Framework 5.3.0 through 5.3.48 allows remote unauthenticated attackers to exhaust server resources by submitting crafted Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions that trigger an integer overflow during evaluation. The CVSS 7.5 score reflects high availability impact with no confidentiality or integrity loss, and no public exploit identified at time of analysis. Applications that evaluate untrusted SpEL input are at greatest risk.

Algorithmic denial of service in Spring Framework SpEL evaluation allows remote unauthenticated attackers to exhaust CPU/memory resources by submitting specially crafted Spring Expression Language expressions, degrading or crashing affected applications. Impacts Spring Framework 5.3.x through 7.0.x in any application that evaluates user-supplied SpEL. No public exploit identified at time of analysis, and the CVSS 7.5 score reflects high availability impact with no confidentiality or integrity compromise.

Denial of service in Spring Framework's Spring MVC and WebFlux static resource resolution allows remote unauthenticated attackers to exhaust application resources, affecting versions 5.3.0-5.3.48, 6.1.0-6.1.27, 6.2.0-6.2.18, and 7.0.0-7.0.7. The CVSS 7.5 score reflects high-impact availability damage over the network with no privileges or user interaction, and at time of analysis no public exploit identified at time of analysis. The flaw was reported by VMware (Spring's maintainer) and is tracked under the official Spring Security advisory.

Predictable WebSocket session IDs in Spring Framework's spring-websocket module allow remote attackers to guess or forge session identifiers and, when paired with weak authorization rules, hijack or interact with other users' WebSocket sessions. The flaw affects Spring Framework 5.3.x, 6.1.x, 6.2.x, and 7.0.x prior to patched releases; no public exploit identified at time of analysis and EPSS is very low (0.03%).

Server-side request forgery (SSRF) in Spring Framework's UriComponentsBuilder affects applications that use this API to parse and validate externally supplied URL strings. Incorrect host parsing allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker - with user interaction - to cause the application server to issue requests to unintended internal or external destinations, exposing low-level confidentiality and integrity impacts. No public exploit identified at time of analysis and no CISA KEV listing; however, SSRF in widely deployed Java frameworks warrants attention in any internet-facing application that processes user-controlled URLs.

Cross-site scripting (XSS) in Spring Framework's MVC JSP form tags allows unauthenticated remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTML or JavaScript into rendered pages by supplying malicious values through the cssClass, cssErrorClass, or cssStyle tag attributes. Applications across four active Spring Framework release lines (5.3.x through 7.0.x) are affected when they pass user-controlled input directly into these tag attributes. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, and CISA has not listed this CVE in the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, but the broad installed base of Spring MVC in enterprise Java environments and the high confidentiality impact (session hijacking, credential theft) warrant prompt patching.

Cross-site scripting in Spring Framework versions 5.3.0-5.3.48, 6.1.0-6.1.27, 6.2.0-6.2.18, and 7.0.0-7.0.7 allows remote attackers to inject JavaScript into victim browsers when applications rely on JavaScriptUtils.javaScriptEscape() for output encoding. The flaw stems from incomplete escaping in this utility method, and successful exploitation requires user interaction (UI:R) such as visiting a crafted page. No public exploit has been identified at time of analysis and the issue is not in CISA KEV.

Open redirect in Spring Framework (Spring MVC and Spring WebFlux) across four major version branches enables unauthenticated remote attackers to craft URLs that cause the application to issue a 302 HTTP redirect to an arbitrary attacker-controlled external host. The vulnerability is conditionally exploitable - requiring a catch-all wildcard route mapping without an explicit view name - and demands user interaction to trigger. CVSS rates this 4.2 Medium (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R); no public exploit code or CISA KEV listing has been identified at time of analysis.

Denial of Service in Spring WebFlux's multipart request processing allows unauthenticated remote attackers to exhaust server resources across all supported Spring Framework branches. Affects Spring Framework 5.3.x through 7.0.x when applications use the reactive WebFlux stack and expose endpoints that accept multipart data. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, and CISA KEV listing is absent, but the network-reachable, zero-privilege attack surface warrants prompt patching for internet-facing WebFlux deployments.

Information disclosure in Spring Framework's static resource resolution affects Spring MVC and WebFlux applications across four active release lines (5.3.x, 6.1.x, 6.2.x, and 7.0.x). Unauthenticated remote attackers exploiting this flaw can access sensitive cached content served through the static resource handling pipeline, achieving high confidentiality impact. No public exploit code or CISA KEV listing has been identified at time of analysis, and the AC:H vector indicates exploitation requires specific conditions beyond default network access.

Path traversal in Spring Framework's static resource resolution exposes arbitrary server files to unauthenticated remote attackers across both Spring MVC and Spring WebFlux stacks. Four major release lines - 5.3.x, 6.1.x, 6.2.x, and 7.0.x - are affected, making this a broad-surface issue for the Java ecosystem. The CVSS vector confirms unauthenticated network access with high confidentiality impact, though the AC:H designation indicates non-trivial exploit conditions; no public exploit has been identified at time of analysis and the vulnerability is not listed in CISA KEV.

Spring Expression Language (SpEL) evaluation logic in Spring Framework 5.3.x through 7.0.x fails to enforce method invocation restrictions in read-only or restricted contexts, allowing remote unauthenticated attackers (CVSS PR:N, AV:N) to invoke arbitrary zero-argument methods and trigger unintended application logic. Scored LOW (3.7) with only availability impact per CVSS (A:L), though the 'Authentication Bypass' tag and CWE-863 (Incorrect Authorization) suggest the authorization bypass itself may have broader implications not fully reflected in the score. No public exploit identified at time of analysis and no CISA KEV listing, but the wide version range across four active Spring Framework release trains represents significant ecosystem exposure.

Multipart request smuggling in Spring Framework's MVC and WebFlux components exposes applications to HTTP request manipulation via CWE-444. Unauthenticated remote attackers (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N per CVSS) can exploit inconsistent multipart boundary parsing to smuggle malformed HTTP requests, achieving low-integrity impact against affected deployments. No public exploit code and no CISA KEV listing have been identified at time of analysis; however, the zero-prerequisite attack profile and broad version coverage across four major Spring branches (5.3.x, 6.1.x, 6.2.x, 7.0.x) make this relevant to any Java shop running Spring MVC or WebFlux with multipart upload handling enabled.

Security bypass in Spring WebFlux's Kotlin Router DSL (CWE-284: Improper Access Control) allows remote unauthenticated attackers to circumvent access control rules in Spring Framework 5.3.0 through 5.3.48. The CVSS vector (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N) indicates network-reachable exploitation without authentication, though high attack complexity constrains opportunistic exploitation. No public exploit identified at time of analysis, and this vulnerability is not listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

Session fixation in Spring Framework's WebFlux reactive stack (versions 5.3.x through 7.0.x) enables a remote attacker to hijack an authenticated user's session by leveraging a compromised subdomain - typically via cross-site scripting - to plant a known session ID and exchange it for the victim's authenticated session post-login. The attack is classified as CWE-384 and requires both a prior subdomain compromise and user interaction, placing real-world exploitability well below the headline concern for most deployments. No public exploit code and no CISA KEV listing have been identified at time of analysis.